Monthly Archives: March 2013

Post navigation

No not really, but if you were the guest list would look very similar to the following list of Senators who voted to let the UN override the 2nd Amendment in the US. 46 Senators voted in favor of this treason not surprisingly every single jewish Senator voted for it. (except lautenberg who didn’t vote)

Share this:

The following article is from the US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health. In it we can glimpse the future. Racism will be classified as a mental disorder, once you have a mental disorder you’re rights are stripped, you cannot buy weapons and they will seize the ones you have, they may forcibly medicate you and you may lose many of the freedoms that everyone else enjoys.

It was not long ago when homosexuality was classified as a mental disorder, now just a few decades later normal White men will be considered the ones who are mentally impaired.

The American Psychiatric Association has never officially recognized extreme racism (as opposed to ordinary prejudice) as a mental health problem, although the issue was raised more than 30 years ago. After several racist killings in the civil rights era, a group of black psychiatrists sought to have extreme bigotry classified as a mental disorder. The association’s officials rejected the recommendation, arguing that because so many Americans are racist, even extreme racism in this country is normative—a cultural problem rather than an indication of psychopathology.

The psychiatric profession’s primary index for diagnosing psychiatric symptoms, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), does not include racism, prejudice, or bigotry in its text or index.1 Therefore, there is currently no support for including extreme racism under any diagnostic category. This leads psychiatrists to think that it cannot and should not be treated in their patients.

To continue perceiving extreme racism as normative and not pathologic is to lend it legitimacy. Clearly, anyone who scapegoats a whole group of people and seeks to eliminate them to resolve his or her internal conflicts meets criteria for a delusional disorder, a major psychiatric illness.

Extreme racists’ violence should be considered in the context of behavior described by Allport in The Nature of Prejudice.2 Allport’s 5-point scale categorizes increasingly dangerous acts. It begins with verbal expression of antagonism, progresses to avoidance of members of disliked groups, then to active discrimination against them, to physical attack, and finally to extermination (lynchings, massacres, genocide). That fifth point on the scale, the acting out of extermination fantasies, is readily classifiable as delusional behavior.

More recently, Sullaway and Dunbar used a prejudice rating scale to assess and describe levels of prejudice.3 They found associations between highly prejudiced people and other indicators of psychopathology. The subtype at the extreme end of their scale is a paranoid/delusional prejudice disorder.

Using the DSM’s structure of diagnostic criteria for delusional disorder,4(p329) I suggest the following subtype:

Prejudice type: A delusion whose theme is that a group of individuals, who share a defining characteristic, in one’s environment have a particular and unusual significance. These delusions are usually of a negative or pejorative nature, but also may be grandiose in content. When these delusions are extreme, the person may act out by attempting to harm, and even murder, members of the despised group(s).

Extreme racist delusions can also occur as a major symptom in other psychotic disorders, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Persons suffering delusions usually have serious social dysfunction that impairs their ability to work with others and maintain employment.

As a clinical psychiatrist, I have treated several patients who projected their own unacceptable behavior and fears onto ethnic minorities, scapegoating them for society’s problems. Their strong racist feelings, which were tied to fixed belief systems impervious to reality checks, were symptoms of serious mental dysfunction. When these patients became more aware of their own problems, they grew less paranoid—and less prejudiced.

It is time for the American Psychiatric Association to designate extreme racism as a mental health problem by recognizing it as a delusional psychotic symptom. Persons afflicted with such psychopathology represent an immediate danger to themselves and others. Clinicians need guidelines for recognizing delusional racism in all its forms so that they can provide appropriate treatment. Otherwise, extreme delusional racists will continue to fall through the cracks of the mental health system, and we can expect more of them to explode and act out their deadly delusions.

Share this:

Just seconds after the trigger of a gun is squeezed, police officers in cities and towns across America are alerted thanks to the latest and greatest state-of-the-art technology. Up-to-the-moment accuracy isn’t always enough, though.

Programs like the ShotSpotter system were already in place in 44 US cities by 2009, and in recent years the company has only added more names to its list of customers that can learn about gun activity the second shots are fired. ShotSpotter’s developers describe it as “a gunfire alert and analysis solution” that uses specialized sensors and software to triangulate and pinpoint the precise location of each spent round within seconds, and dozens of law enforcement agencies across the United States have signed-on.

When it’s a matter of life or death, though, seconds can mean all the difference. That’s the reasoning, at least, for why a number of police departments across America are relying not just on systems like ShotSpotter but other, more Orwellian surveillance techniques to spy on citizens and predict problems before they even occur. The result, depending on who you ask, means a drop in crime. It also, however, could mean no one is safe from the ever watching eye of Big Brother.

Predictive policing programs that rely on algorithms and historic data to hypothesize the location and nature of future crimes are already being deployed New York City and other towns. Last month, in fact, Seattle, Washington Mayor Mike McGinn announced that two precincts there were starting to use predictive policing programs, promising “This technology will allow us to be proactive rather than reactive in responding to crime.”

“The Predictive Policing software is estimated to be twice as effective as a human data analyst working from the same information” Seattle Police Chief John Diaz told reporters. “It’s all part of our effort to build an agile, flexible and innovative police department that provides the best service possible to the public.”

But specialized software and sensors aren’t the only tools law enforcement officers are using to look into suspicious activity. In Los Angeles, one police department has at least one officer on the clock 24 hours a day patrolling social media sites for unusual activity.

Tweets, Facebook posts and even Instagram photos are all subject to surveillance, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Capt. Mike Parker admits to the San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Parker works with the eight-member Electronic Communications Triage, or eComm Unit that monitor public social media posts at all hours of the day in order to see if advertised parties and other get-togethers could benefit from a surprise visit by the police.

“They’re watching social media and Internet comments that pertain to this geographic area, watching what would pertain to our agencies so we can prevent crime, help the public,” Parker says. “And now they’re going to be ramping up more and more with more sharing and interacting, especially during crises, whether it’s local or regional.”

Tribute writer Brenda Gazzar cites unspecified incidents in LA where teenagers attend parties, drink heavily and engage in illegal activity. “The partygoers usually get high, get a girl drugged up and then sexually assault her,” Gazzar quotes Capt. Parker. “Often gang members will show up, start fighting over a girl and end up shooting or stabbing someone.”

“We are absolutely and completely convinced that we are preventing wild assaults from our efforts with these illegal social media advertised parties,” Capt. Parker says, adding that the eComm unit has already thwarter around 250 “illegal parties” in Los Angeles County.

So-called “illegal parties” aren’t the only thing being searched for, though. The Tribune goes on to say that “unsanctioned protests” are also put under the magnifying glass by officers with the eComm unit who actively scour to Web to see what demonstrations are being planned and by whom.

Capt. Parker says the eComm unit doesn’t search for specific people, just certain activity, and stands by the system so far. With a number of other law enforcement agencies using state-of-the-art technologies to try and stop crime, though, it’s forcing more and more Americans to submit to a society where the police become privy to their personal activity, whether they like it or not.

Karen North, director of the University of Southern California’s Annenberg Program on Online Communities, tells the Tribune that scouring social media sites for suspicious activity is “a smart move” on behalf of law enforcement, and that “All people should know that anything you put up on social media is public.”

“Even if you put it up on your private Facebook feed, you should still assume it’s public” she tells the Tribune. When social media analysts have access to other implements, however, it raises all sorts of questions about what activity is fair game for the fuzz.

Evgeny Morozov, a Bulgarian writer and researcher, reports for the UK’s Observer this week that police agencies are starting to combine more and more of the data that enters eComm divisions and other units in agencies across the United States. In New York City, for example, Morozov acknowledges that the NYPD’s recently rolled-out Domain Awareness System doesn’t start and end with real-time gunshot alerts. That system, he says, “syncs the city’s 3,000 closed-circuit camera feeds with arrest records, 911 calls, licence plate recognition technology and radiation detectors.”

“It can monitor a situation in real time and draw on a lot of data to understand what’s happening. The leap from here to predicting what might happen is not so great,” he says.

The thousands of surveillance cameras on the island of Manhattan alone have existed for years, and the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups have led relentless campaigns against the NYPD’s all-watching spy system and other constitutional-questionable behavior that brings every step in the City that Never Sleeps subject to police scrutiny. On the other side of the country, though, Seattle, Washington is soon becoming the surveillance capital of America. Earlier this year it was revealed that the major Pacific Northwest hub is in the midst of installing 30 surveillance cameras that will create a “wireless mesh network security system” on the city’s harbor that can be monitored by law enforcement agencies across the region. Coupled with other activity, though, Seattle’s eye-in-the-sky programs might be more serious than once suspected.

When Seattle recently signed onto the ShotSpotter system at a cost of $950,000 over two years for installation and operation, the city agreed to install 52 mobile gunshot locators that can collect intelligence up to 600 feet away using high-tech microphones and cameras.

“Having a private corporation control more than fifty audio/video surveillance stations in Seattle is likely to attract external interest,” security researcher Jacob Appelbaum tweeted over the weekend. A resident of Seattle, Appelbaum wrote on Twitter that he was looking for more information about the on-the-rise spy program being constructed in his city. “I find it rather depressing that surveillance/dataveillance programs are created and are used without so much as a public discussion,” he tweeted. “It would be interesting to learn how much money it costs to spin up the system and to FOIA the real data as input into the system.”

With public discourse on the subject sparse in many cities, though, obtaining, processing and sharing information with other concerned residents isn’t as commonplace as Appelbaum and others might want it to be. When many cities sign contracts with ShotSpotter, press write-ups are few and far between. In other locales, cameras that monitor car traffic are accepted as a necessity to curb red-light runners and other haphazard drivers. Rarely, however, is it discussed what other intelligence these cameras collect, and with whom it’s being shared with.

Predictive policing “may very well end up reducing crime to a certain degree,” Loyola Law School professor Stan Goldman told National Public Radio in a 2011 interview. “The question is at what cost, at what price?”

According to a CBS report, a predictive policing program in an area of Los Angeles drove burglaries down by one-third in a matter of only five months. And when ShotSpotter was first installed in Saginaw, Michigan, crime soon dropped by 30 percent. As for the price, however, consider this: if each of the 52 ShotSpotter sensors in Seattle can collect data within a radius of 600 feet, then roughly 58,780,800 square feet of the city under surveillance — or over 2 square miles where privacy ceases to exist. That, of course, isn’t even taking into account the other surveillance systems in place, including the one on the city’s harbor.

And don’t even think about sharing this story on Facebook.

Share this:

WASHINGTON — Republican U.S. Israeli Sen. Rand Paul is endorsing a path to citizenship for the nation’s illegal immigrants, a significant move for a favorite of tea party Republicans who are often seen as hostile to such an approach.

Paul’s path to citizenship comes with conditions that could make it lengthy and difficult for illegal immigrants to travel, according to a speech he was to deliver Tuesday morning to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Among the conditions, Congress would have to agree first that progress has been made on border security.

Nonetheless, Paul’s endorsement of allowing illegal immigrants an eventual way to become citizens puts him in line with a growing number of Republicans who are embracing action on immigration as a way to broaden the GOP’s appeal to Latinos.

Mr. Reid turned down her attempt to bring her ban on 157 different weapons and ammunition clips aboard the Democratic Party’s comprehensive gun bill, Politico reported.”

I think this is encouraging, although I’m not celebrating yet. As I wrote yesterday the UN Gun Treaty (pushed by Soros) which I don’t claim to be an expert on is moving into its final stages. I’d be somewhat surprised if this had much noticeable bearing on US gun owners but if it does have an effect it certainly won’t be positive. Another thought as to why they seem to be abandoning the AWB is their new trick of the DHS buying billions of rounds of ammo clogging up the supply lines and ensuring shortages for months if not years in the future. Armed with literally a printing press there is no doubt they could do this long into the future.

So while the AWB appears to be stuck it is no time to celebrate or let your guard down. History has shown the ultimate goal of the marxists and while we may not know the form it will take we know their intent, which hasn’t changed.

Share this:

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – Negotiators from around 150 countries gather in New York on Monday for a final push to hammer out a binding international treaty to end unregulated conventional arms sales, a pact that a powerful U.S. pro-gun lobby is urging Washington to reject.

Arms control campaigners and human rights advocates say one person every minute dies worldwide as a result of armed violence, and that a treaty is needed to halt the uncontrolled flow of weapons and ammunition that they argue helps fuel wars, atrocities and rights abuses.

The U.N. General Assembly voted in December to relaunch negotiations this week on what could become the first global treaty to regulate the world’s $70 billion trade for all conventional weapons – from naval ships, tanks and attack helicopters to handguns and assault rifles – after a drafting conference in July 2012 collapsed because the United States, then Russia and China, wanted more time.

Delegates to the July conference said that Washington had wanted to push the issue past the November 2012 presidential election, though the administration of President Barack Obama denied that. The current negotiations will run through March 28.

The United States says it wants a strong treaty. But Obama is under pressure from the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA), the leading U.S. pro-gun group, to block the pact. The group has vowed to torpedo the convention’s Senate ratification if Washington backs it at the United Nations.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry voiced conditional support for the treaty on Friday, saying Washington was “steadfast in its commitment to achieve a strong and effective Arms Trade Treaty that helps address the adverse effects of the international arms trade on global peace and stability.

But he repeated that the United States – the world’s No. 1 arms manufacturer – would not accept a treaty that imposed new limits on U.S. citizens’ right to bear arms, a sensitive political issue in the United States.

The NRA has dismissed suggestions that a December U.S. school shooting massacre in Connecticut bolstered the case for a global arms pact. It has also warned that the treaty would undermine U.S. citizens’ right to own guns, a position that supporters of the treaty say is false.

The American Bar Association, an attorneys’ lobbying group, last month disputed the NRA position, saying in a paper “ratification of the treaty would not infringe upon rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment.”

AMMO: ‘THE FUEL OF CONFLICT’

The point of the treaty is to set standards for all cross-border transfers of any type of conventional weapon – light and heavy. It also would set binding requirements for nations to review all cross-border arms contracts to ensure the munitions will not be used in human rights abuses, do not violate embargoes and are not illegally diverted.

Diplomats say that if the treaty conference fails to reach the required consensus because the United States, Russia or another major arms producer opposes it, nations can still put the draft treaty to a vote in the U.N. General Assembly.

The other alternative is to amend the draft to make it acceptable to the U.S. and other delegations. But supporters of the treaty fear that could lead to a weak and meaningless pact.

“The U.S. traditionally has an allergy to treaties,” a European diplomat told Reuters. “It might be better to have a good treaty without the U.S. and hope they come around later.”

The treaty focuses solely on international arms transfers. If a pact is approved in New York, it will require ratification by national legislatures before it can take effect.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called for a pact “that regulates international transfers of both weapons and ammunition and provides for common standards for exporting states.”

“These standards are important for assessing the risks that transferred weapons are not used to fuel conflict, arm criminals or abet violations of international humanitarian or human rights law,” he said.

Negotiations over the next two weeks will not be easy, U.N. diplomats say. Washington opposes inclusion of ammunition in the treaty. Rights groups and arms control advocates hope the U.S. delegation will compromise on the question of ammunition.

“Ammunition is literally the fuel of conflict,” said Roy Isbister of Saferworld, a peace lobby group (funded by Soros). “Without ammunition, the guns fall silent.”

Rights groups have urged delegations to repair loopholes in the current draft treaty, which they say could leave avenues for abusers of human rights to continue getting weapons.

They say the partial coverage of ammunition in the current draft is a major weakness. Rights groups say that the global ammunitions industry for small arms and light weapons is worth $4.3 billion, with 12 billion bullets produced each year.